Unlimited Replayability | Cakez Reacts

[@pixelbit_]

oh god not that video. why must my worst video perform the best.

[@PHeMoX]

20:00 For what it is worth, updates in terms of content really only go so far in a post-launch situation. It either needs to add to an already incredible gameloop, not break the 'meta' or just attract players that stopped playing. As a developer you will still need to earn some money to allow for such an update cycle to continue. A lot of multiplayer games are forced to add new content, because without it old players will quit and new players will find an empty game lobby. Usually we see a lot of low-effort content updates.

[@Huedini74]

Another cool video, thank you Cakez for always finding and looking at ideas to teach us the finer details of game dev.

[@PHeMoX]

5:00 It's really not about quantity though. I've played single maps of multiplayer games for like 600 hours, just because that one level was so good, hitting the leaderboard as sniper etc. And it was repetitive. I think the main gameloop needs to be good enough to come back for again and again. It has nothing to do with quantity of content. I also disagree that multiplayer is always a reason to come back to a game. A lot of multiplayer games struggle to keep gamers invested. Many of the more artificial rewards in those games _don't_ actually work. Skyrim is a pretty terrible game. It is so insanely overrated.

[@PHeMoX]

25:00 Playing a game like Celeste and learning to beat a level really is not _grinding_ , lol. 25:40 Is that even really true though????? Leveling up your character usually is part of a quite impactful power fantasy and allows you to progress in a substantial way. Only in bad games it will feel unnecessary or tedious.

[@Senguh]

I used to play through Gothic 2 once a year, while i played through elden ring once and never felt like exploring it again.

[@PHeMoX]

People are so wrong about World of Warcraft. It basically was this first-of-its-kind online chatbox with an overload of active players due to a popular franchise, making it a very socially engaging experience. The game itself, especially early on, sucked. And Blizzard ruined the challenging aspects very quickly. Players kept getting back for social reasons. And paying a monthly fee also must have forced people to play on. New content _barely_ mattered, as it served only as an excuse to team up again with some virtual friends. That's the number one reason why WoW is still alive now, when from a game design perspective it should have been dead over a decade ago. The same game also wouldn't have worked with a difference franchise, due to how loyal Warcraft fans are. Probably. The hilarious thing about WoW is how gamers with the nostalgia boner are trying to find what made the game actually good in WoW Classic, when really it never was all that good to begin with.

[@Pistallion1]

Na WoW was not thr first of its kind. It was the first of its kind to have actually good gameplay, which set it apart from mmos at its time